The more power China has accumulated, the more it has attempted to achieve its foreign-policy objectives with bluff, bluster, and bullying. But, as its Himalayan border standoff with India’s military continues, the limits of this approach are becoming increasingly apparent.
The current standoff began in mid-June, when Bhutan, a close ally of India, discovered the People’s Liberation Army trying to extend a road through Doklam, a high-altitude plateau in the Himalayas that belongs to Bhutan, but is claimed by China. India, which guarantees tiny Bhutan’s security, quickly sent troops and equipment to halt the construction, asserting that the road – which would overlook the point where Tibet, Bhutan, and the Indian state of Sikkim meet – threatened its own security.
Since then, China’s leaders have been warning India almost daily to back down or face military reprisals. China’s defense ministry has threatened to teach India a “bitter lesson,” vowing that any conflict would inflict “greater losses” than the Sino-Indian War of 1962, when China invaded India during a Himalayan border dispute and inflicted major damage within a few weeks. Likewise, China’s Foreign Ministry has unleashed a torrent of vitriol intended to intimidate India into submission.
Despite all of this, India’s government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has kept its cool, refusing to respond to any Chinese threat, much less withdraw its forces. As China’s warmongering has continued, its true colors have become increasingly vivid. It is now clear that China is attempting to use psychological warfare (“psywar”) to advance its strategic objectives – to “win without fighting,” as the ancient Chinese military theorist Sun Tzu recommended.
China has waged its psywar against India largely through disinformation campaigns and media manipulation, aimed at presenting India – a raucous democracy with poor public diplomacy – as the aggressor and China as the aggrieved party. Chinese state media have been engaged in eager India-bashing for weeks. China has also employed “lawfare,” selectively invoking a colonial-era accord, while ignoring its own violations – cited by Bhutan and India – of more recent bilateral agreements.
For the first few days of the standoff, China’s psywar blitz helped it dominate the narrative. But, as China’s claims and tactics have come under growing scrutiny, its approach has faced diminishing returns. In fact, from a domestic perspective, China’s attempts to portray itself as the victim – claiming that Indian troops had illegally entered Chinese territory, where they remain – has been distinctly damaging, provoking a nationalist backlash over the failure to evict the intruders.
As a result, President Xi Jinping’s image as a commanding leader, along with the presumption of China’s regional dominance, is coming under strain, just months before the critical 19th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). And it is difficult to see how Xi could turn the situation around.
Despite China’s overall military superiority, it is scarcely in a position to defeat India decisively in a Himalayan war, given India’s fortified defenses along the border. Even localized hostilities at the tri-border area would be beyond China’s capacity to dominate, because the Indian army controls higher terrain and has greater troop density. If such military clashes left China with so much as a bloodied nose, as happened in the same area in 1967, it could spell serious trouble for Xi at the upcoming National Congress.
But, even without actual conflict, China stands to lose. Its confrontational approach could drive India, Asia’s most important geopolitical “swing state,” firmly into the camp of the United States, China’s main global rival. It could also undermine its own commercial interests in the world’s fastest-growing major economy, which sits astride China’s energy-import lifeline.
Already, Indian Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj has tacitly warned of economic sanctions if China, which is running an annual trade surplus of nearly $60 billion with India, continues to disturb border peace. More broadly, as China has declared unconditional Indian troop withdrawal to be a “prerequisite” for ending the standoff, India, facing recurrent Chinese incursions over the last decade, has insisted that border peace is a “prerequisite” for developing bilateral ties.
Against this background, the smartest move for Xi would be to attempt to secure India’s help in finding a face-saving compromise to end the crisis. The longer the standoff lasts, the more likely it is to sully Xi’s carefully cultivated image as a powerful leader, and that of China as Asia’s hegemon, which would undermine popular support for the regime at home and severely weaken China’s influence over its neighbors.
Already, the standoff is offering important lessons to other Asian countries seeking to cope with China’s bullying. For example, China recently threatened to launch military action against Vietnam’s outposts in the disputed Spratly Islands, forcing the Vietnamese government to stop drilling for gas at the edge of China’s exclusive economic zone in the South China Sea.
China does not yet appear ready to change its approach. Some experts even predict that it will soon move forward with a “small-scale military operation” to expel the Indian troops currently in its claimed territory. But such an attack is unlikely to do China any good, much less change the territorial status quo in the tri-border area. It certainly won’t make it possible for China to resume work on the road it wanted to build. That dream most likely died when India called the Chinese bully’s bluff.
Brahma Chellaney, Professor of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and Fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin, is the author of nine books, including Asian Juggernaut, Water: Asia’s New Battleground, and Water, Peace, and War: Confronting the Global Water Crisis.
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2017.
www.project-syndicate.org

Why India is worried about China’s dam projects on the Brahmaputra …
economictimes.indiatimes.com › News › Politics and Nation
Oct 5, 2016 – China said it was building a dam on a tributary of the Yarlung … It is also the city from where China intends to extend its railway towards Nepal
this is true pakistian conqueror and rule india for so many centuary
and honestly u have the pak in yr blood
should love yr neighbour pakistian cause they conqueror and rule indian for so many centuary.cause they won’t spare any indian woman
u better talk about the 1962 after india incursion into china territory
That is not true….actually Mao was a greedy pig he knew the americans,arabs,french,british,germans,japanese had money during 1970s & also technology…..they asked him to feed the russians in return for wealth & technology that is how the mao dynasty became friends with george washington dynasty.Otherwise chinese would not have prospered because you did not know how to create automobile industry also including tyres for a car.Forget automobiles chinese were not knowing how to make a machinery for sewing clothes in industrial scale or even threads,labels also.So modern china became rich because of political alliance with americans & technology/financial help from the axis powers like Japan,Germany,Italy & also initial help from russians in steel,ship,nuclear,agricultural industries.
Yv Onne Koh : Please try attacking India and not bark like a bitch everyday through your Global times.
It is Indian squat on Chinese land, and enter uninvited in Bhutan, refuse to leave since 1962 in Nepal, and annexed Sikkim. Your country must produce very portent weed to put you people under such delusion.
Fifu Ji Why not give a try?
This is how china creates propganda https://www.voanews.com/a/who-is-that-chinese-troll/3540663.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/19/the-chinese-government-fakes-nearly-450-million-social-media-comments-a-year-this-is-why/
India should also notify China about building a road in Beijing
Yv Onne Koh You should read some of the Dalai Lama’s works about how much Tibet loves China 😉
Stick to government stance here ok. Every idiot with access to the internet has something to say about someone.
Jo Snow There are plenty of blogs floating all over the place – what is the position of the Government of Bhutan here?
Frankly, if China had listened to Bhutan’s protests over the building of the road in the disputed region, this whole incident would not have occurred. China is just used to getting its way all the time using its economic or military might. So China just disregarded Bhutan’s sentiments here and proceeded with construction of the road – the results of this bullying is there for the whole world to see.
W.r.t building dams – there are international processes regarding use of water. No country, India, China, Nepal or anyone else can be stupid enough to threaten water wars.
It is astonishing how the Chinese act with such hubris and arrogance to walk
roughshod over tiny countries like Vietnam and Bhutan. Also take a look a Chinese allies – a crazy regime in North Korea and Terrorist supporting international pariah – Pakistan.
China likes to think they are the master of all of Asia but this incident as it drags on will wake them up from that dream. Other East Asian countries fear and despise China and they will move into alliances to counter China eventually.
Chinese arrogance and hubris will cause it to be boxed in eventually if they do not learn to live in peace with neighbors.
Tarun Kumar Well, I agree. Anyother country would have taken Indian to underground already.
In the 1962 war China had nothing to fight with. They suffered so much hardship trying to defence their land. This time with their enomous industrial capacities, I think they have sufficient arms to take down the Indians, but never never under estimate your opponent.
The Indian succeeded in hookwinking the world in 1962 until Neville Maxwell exposed the truth. This time the Indian want to do another hattrick. The world should be wiser now.
Karthik Sunder why not read up Sourabh Gupta http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2017/07/26/to-doklam-and-back-india-china-standoff/ and M.K. Bhadrakumar July 17, 2017 http://www.atimes.com/article/indian-military-standoff-china-bhutan/
Kevin I suggest you read Bhutanese Wangcha Sangey’s blog
Karthik Sunder would you be so kind as to read Wangcha Sangey’s blog.
Nice try professor Brahma Chellaney, Professor of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and Fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin. How about finding out what Bhutanese are thinking about the whole mess. Maybe be humble enough to read Bhutanese Wangcha Sangey blog.
It is now clear that India trepass the area under effective Chinese control although Bhutan raised and disputed the area during the 20th round of the Sino-Bhutan border talks at the urging of India. Bhutanese army did not request India army intervention. Indian army invited themselves. If China cannot build roads in areas that is under effective Chinese control, although now disputed by Bhutan, by the same logic India cannot build any military roads and airports in disputed Arunachal Pradesh. Although Doklam is disputed by Bhutan, it has no right to stop China from building a road, what more India being a non-claimant.
The present standoff is Modi’s act tough foreign policy on China. Playing the Dalai Lama card, visit by USA embassador to Arunachal Pradesh, publicly blaming China for failure to join NSG where India refused to ratify the NPT.
Which country can tolerate trepassing from a neighbouring country’s army? This is an act of war. India being a market for Chinese product should not be a factor in sovereignty issue. Sovereignty is not for sale. If the role is reversed, China intrude into Sikkim, I dont think India is going to keep quiet. All hell will break loose. Indians would be baying for blood. DEclare war on China, kick out the Chinese, give the Chinese a bloody nose, etc. All the venom would be let loose.
China has crisply presented the facts, photographs and map showing their case, while India got to change the story from being requested by Bhutan to intervene, to coordinating with Bhutan, to protecting Bhutan. India also cited a 2012 tri-party agreement and then changed to 2012 tri-party understanding.
The only reason why India’s foreign ministry is so uncharacteristicly quiet is because they realised they have breached international law by crossing the border. The longer the issue drags on, the more India will suffer. It will give time to China to mobilize, and carefully choose where to strike, and not necessary at Doklam. The whole border will be fair game. Attack where least expected and bypass what is heavily defended.
From day 1, India has mobilzed hundreds of thousands of troops in Sikkim and Siliguri ready for battle. It is all pre-mediated and well planned. India is ready to give the Chinese a bloody nose. Maybe, but then China can choose to attack elsewhere where it is advantagous. Only time will tell.